KUALA LUMPUR – Alleging that authorities charged her for running an unlicensed nursery after failing to find evidence of child abuse, a 31-year-old woman is suing the federal government for RM471,000 in damages as part of a malicious prosecution suit.
The plaintiff, who runs Pusat Jagaan Kanak-Kanak Kreatif Gemilang in Shah Alam, explained that she was summoned to the district police headquarters there on January 18, 2022, to give a statement pertaining to injuries sustained by a baby in her care.
The following month after additional investigations by police, she received charge papers from the investigating officer.
“On February 24, 2022, the plaintiff received charged papers from the first defendant (investigating officer) which stated that the plaintiff is accused of managing an unregistered child care centre under the Child Care Centre Act 1984.
“The plaintiff was surprised because the police’s questions during the investigations were related to the injuries suffered by a baby,” the plaintiff’s statement of claim dated March 8 said.
Before she was charged with the offence at the Shah Alam magistrates’ court, the investigating officer was told by the plaintiff that the charge was wrong because her centre was not a nursery or child care centre for the purposes of the Child Care Centre Act 1984.
“Although the investigating officer was physically present at the daycare centre and took photos of the ‘Pusat Jagaan Kanak-Kanak Kreatif Gemilang’ signboard, our business name was minuted in investigation papers as ‘Taska Kanak-Kanak Kreatif Gemilang,” the statement of claim added.
Three months later, the daycare centre’s lawyers sent a representation letter to the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) for a review of the case, among other things, explaining that the plaintiff did not operate a nursery, but a daycare centre registered under the Care Centre Act 1993.
Despite being aware of the plaintiff’s representation letter, the case was delayed for six months while awaiting the AGC’s decision on the letter.
“This has caused prejudice to the plaintiff’s business because customers stopped sending their children to the centre due to the ongoing prosecution,” the statement of claim explained.
After 10 months of delays, the court finally set a date on January 30, 2023, to hear the AGC’s decision on the letter – whereby prosecutors stated they refused to continue with the case.
“It is clear from the plaintiff’s discharge and acquittal that there was no offence committed under the Child Care Act 1984.
“The defendants committed malicious prosecution against the plaintiff,” court documents said.
According to the statement of claim, the decision to prosecute the plaintiff under the Child Care Act 1984 was made after the authorities could not find evidence of abuse related to the injured baby under her care.
The plaintiff is seeking general damages amounting to RM471,000 and exemplary damages amounting to RM100,000, among other things.
The investigating officer, former Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Acryl Sani, a deputy public prosecutor, former Attorney-General Tan Sri Idrus Harun, and the federal government are named as defendants.
Based on the e-filing system, the matter is set for case management on October 2. – September 16, 2024